What is a Woman? A Court Has Spoken
“What is a woman?”
My five-decade old oversized, unabridged dictionary defines “woman” as “1) a female human being (distinguished from ‘man’), 2) an adult female person,” and lists one antonym: “man.”
Twenty years ago, any high school biology student could answer that question. Back then, educators taught their students that biological XX and XY chromosomes, respectively, sexually imprint every cell of every female and male body.
More recently, “woke” activists have replaced those biological facts with a bunch of pseudoscientific bafflegab they expect everyone to accept without question – a “theory” incorporating “gender and sexual identity.”
“Transgender theory is an emerging theoretical orientation on the nature of gender and gender identity in understanding the lived experiences of transgender and transsexual individuals. It is distinct in emphasizing the importance of physical embodiment in gender and sexual identity. Transgender theory integrates this embodiment with the self and socially constructed aspects of identity through the lived experiences of those with intersecting identities. Thus, it provides a theoretical basis for reconciling feminist and queer theoretical scholarship with social work practice and advocacy, with regard not only to issues of working with transgenders but also to larger issues of group identity and social oppression. This article describes the emergence of transgender theory from feminist and queer theories that used social constructivist approaches to challenge essentialist ideas that maintained the oppression of certain gender and sexual identities. Transgender theory is also applied to specific issues of understanding, working with, and empowering transgender persons and building coalitions between them and other socially oppressed groups.”
Got that? Me neither…
On April 16, sanity returned to the transgender controversy when the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom ruled that the definition of “woman” under that nation’s “equalities law” refers to biological sex. “The unanimous decision of this court is that the terms woman and sex in the Equality Act of 2010 refer to a biological woman and biological sex.”
The court’s clarification sought to “ensure coherence in legal protections and rights, especially in single sex environments.”
According to the court, the terms “woman” and “sex” are predicated on biological distinctions, and that spaces designated for women will offer security based on those biological definitions.
Predictably, hair-triggered “trans-rights” activists described the ruling as “troubling” – and worse – although no mention was made of exactly what “rights” men who pretend to be women would lose. In fact, transgender “females” would have the same rights as every other citizen, minus their assumed imaginary “rights” to invade the privacy of biological women’s facilities and taking over women’s sports.
Take note of the transgender theory’s emphasis on coalescing with “other socially repressed groups.”
“Social justice” activists in America have created a social hierarchy based on contrived victimhood, which, in the case of transgenderism, at least, rejects biological science. In place of biology, they are peddling a “personal sense of gender.”
Activists have gained enough influence in the American press, government, and in higher and public education to demand and receive, at the expense of decency, safety and fairness, special treatment and access to biological women’s public restrooms, changing rooms and athletic competitions.
The American left has turned public indecency, once a crime, into a civil rights issue – and if an opportunistic pervert, a criminal or mentally-disturbed male exposing his genitalia to little girls in the name of “trans rights” offends, or, worse, outrages you, you’re a trans-phobe, a shameful bigot.
In America, trans “culture” has invaded K-12 classrooms, libraries and other public places. Certain transgendered adults and adult enablers – with the left’s full-throated approval, mind you – are targeting – recruiting – kids, toddlers included, with sexually explicit reading/teaching material and public venue drag shows.
But, now, the larger public’s patience for trangenders’ sense of entitlement has about run out.
Nonetheless, trans activists consider the UK court’s decision giving women legally-defined boundaries an injustice. They’re raging about the “fascism” of no longer being allowed to expose themselves to women and little girls.
The Founders based America’s system of jurisprudence on English Common Law. One hopes that the sanity, the wisdom of the United Kingdom’s Supreme Court will reach our, their former colony’s court system, and end, once and for all, the sheer lunacy, incoherence and absurdity of transgender “rights” that permit misogynistic trans activists to infringe on the natural rights of biological women and girls.
https://www.pottsmerc.com/2025/04/27/jerry-shenk-what-is-a-woman-a-court-has-spoken/
